Updates from August, 2016 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • rogerglewis 7:30 am on August 31, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    Neo Liberalism, Billy No Mates? ,or, just misunderstood and kind to small children and animals? 

    Neo Liberalism, Billy No Mates? ,or, just misunderstood and kind to small children and animals?

    Green Leadership  Results pending. Dialogue with Founder memebr of The peoples party/Ecology Party and Now greens Clive Lord.

    In the recent hustings for the Green Party leadership for the Green Party of England and Wales I have had a few interesting dialogues with Clive Lord and sought out some of his writing to see what made and still makes him Tick. I have also had a similar exchange of tweets and comments with Dereck Wall another former speaker candidate for the Green Party of England and wales.

    Clives Stich is citizens income or universal basic income. Its mine too so we have a common objective and our reasoning to get to that place one would think would be similar. Well to answer that yes and no. Clive and I agree that exponential growth on a finite planet is impossible and that the strain on the Common resources of the planet is to great and decisions uninformed by externalities are less than sensible. We are in a completely different place on Political Economy though and our understanding of Money and Money creation.

    Clive recently Blogged under the title.

    SOCIALISTS AND NEOLIBERALS CAN AND MUST BE FRIENDS

    4 responses to “Socialists and neoliberals can and must be friends

    1. Hi Clive,
      Neo Liberalism is a pretty broad political philosophy but starts with the notion Look after the Economy and the large economic Players and the rest will look after itself. It is classical Liberalisms very close First Cousin. Neo Conservatism is also its sibling
      I was reading some of your published work on these questions last week also and wonder how far you have got in your thinking with Money creation and the question of Interest on money. This is for me the nub of the matter something I have in common with Joseph Prouhdon, explained by Peter Kropotkin in the Encyclopedia Britannica thus.
      https://archive.org/stream/PeterKropotkinEntryOnanarchismFromTheEncyclopdiaBritannica/Peter-Kropotkin-Anarchism-Encyclopdia-Britannica-Eleventh-Edition_djvu.txt
      ”Now Proudhon advocated a society without government, and
      used the word Anarchy to describe it. Proudhon repudiated,
      as is known, all schemes of Communism, according to which
      mankind would be driven into communistic monasteries or
      barracks, as also all the schemes of state or state-aided Socialism
      which were advocated by Louis Blanc and the Collectivists. When
      he proclaimed in his first memoir on property that ” Property
      is theft,” he meant only property in its present, Roman-law,
      sense of ” right of use and abuse ” ; in property-rights, on the other
      hand, understood in the limited sense of possession, he saw the
      best protection against the encroachments of the state. At the
      same time he did not want violently to dispossess the present
      owners of land, dwelling-houses, mines, factories and so on. He
      preferred to attain the same end by rendering capital incapable
      of earning interest; and this he proposed to obtain by means of
      a national bank, based on the mutual confidence of all those who
      are engaged in production, who would agree to exchange among
      themselves their produces at cost-value, by means of labour
      cheques representing the hours of labour required to produce
      every given commodity. Under such a system, which Proudhon
      described as ” Mutuellisme,” all the exchanges of services would be
      strictly equivalent. Besides, such a bank would be enabled to
      lend money without interest, levying only something like 1 %,
      or even less, for covering the cost of administration. Every one
      being thus enabled to borrow the money that would be required
      to buy a house, nobody would agree to pay any more a yearly
      rent for the use of it. A general ” social liquidation ” would
      thus be rendered easy, without violent expropriation. The same
      applied to mines, railways, factories and so on. ”
      We can learn a lot from the Swiss referendum on Citizens Income as discussed here.
      ´However, the nearly universal misunderstanding of money is a major obstacle. For too long we’ve allowed a small coterie of bankers and “court economists” to hold the secrets and “tutor” us. So, it’s time for total openness.
      First, regarding the claim that the Swiss proposal would’ve been too costly, what’s entirely omitted from the discussion is that the proposal (and similar proposals elsewhere) appear to call for re-distribution of existing money—taking money from certain sectors through taxation and re-allocating it to the people at-large.
      The implication is that the money supply is basically static and that re-distributing limited funds would require tough budget decisions—sparking tax hikes and associated spending increases in several areas; hence the claim “costs too much.”
      But a successful basic-income plan can and must be based on the creation of new money, or “distributism,” not on reshuffling existing money, which is “re-distributism.” That’s the “state secret” that no one wants to touch.
      The issuance of new money needs to happen to overcome the huge “gap” between today’s paltry purchasing power and the massive mountain of debt and the towering totality of prices on all available goods and services. We have full stores and empty wallets. (Ideally and importantly, governments should reclaim their interest-free money-creation rights and forbid private central banks from creating money any longer).´´
      http://leconomistamascherato.blogspot.se/2016/07/basic-income-lets-name-real-problems.html
      Banking reform is a tricky business I think Clive and usury is their business and price discovery in the market is their creed. Those of us that understand the finite planet and exponential growth disjoint will I think find it very hard to make the Bankers our freinds and Neo Liberalism being the Political Wing of the Usury industry will not be won over. On this basis I disagree with the direction of the argument in your piece here.
      • My definition of neoliberalism is based on hearing Monbiot – the 0.1%, (not 1%) who are in complete control of everything to all intents and purposes. But you could accuse me of sloppy writing. What I really mean is that a lot people who are generally ‘right of centre’ should be seeing the Greens asaiming for what they want to see.
        I guess you are a’Positive Money’ supporter. I was persuaded otherwise by two formidable brains, Jonathan Dixon who is no longer active in the Green Party, andAlison Marshall, who does blog and correspond.Dixon convinced me that money is neutral. I twill facvour faithfully and well whatever ethos is in control. Ergo, if people generally make growthist assumptions and ant to buy cravans and yachts and things, the banks telling them tey aren’t allwed to lend much will only infuriate people against whover imposed such restrictions. On the other hand, if expectaions are low, I claim I always expected interest rates to approach zero, as they have done. tha tto me supports Dixon’s thesis.
        So we have to achieve th culture shift which regards less stuff as the norm, not just a blip.
        I envisage the Cits BI as normally being balanced by taxation in some shape or for, not necessarily just on personal incomes. Land VAlue Tax seems to me an obvious feature. I would however see money creation along the lines of ‘Helicopter Money’ whenever economic activity fell below what was ecologically sustainable.
        The Swiss result was not widely reported here so far as I am aware, but one comment I did receive from an email group I belong to was that the ‘scare’ of floods of immigrants taking advantage was what made the result so one sided.
        • Hi Clive,
          The standard economics theory and practice is that money is neutral the treasury growth models and the ones of the big city banks and accountants ignore it completely. This notion is similar to the notion of Climate modelling ignoring the sun it is the standard establishment approach and makes the sums easier but lacks a certain Je ne sais quoi.
          on Neo Liberalism , this is a video interview I did with Roy Madron.
          On the monetocracy here is an interview with Roy from the early noughties about his book Gaiain democracies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3njSwTej4No
          I have been corresponding with Roy and reading drafts of his new book on Super Competent democracies.As Roy says, Neo Liberalism is a whole ideology against state provision of anything and inimicable to the interests of society, which it actually claims does not exist. Capitalism Roy says can and does exist and do Fine with high levels of Democracy seeing social provision as a cost of doing business. Neo Liberalism is not pragmatic at all, it is an elitist and fanantical creed, almost cult likein many ways.
          My monetary reform activism Clive is not limited to being a Positive MONEY supporter or indeed a supporter of David Malone for GP leader, or any one organisation, institution or individual, I do not do Tribal. I also undertstand Modern Monetary Theory but disagree with their stance on state sanctioned usury (On Usury I am in a very small minority , This is also true of my Anarchist beliefs ). and support thier efforts but also follow the Social Credit movement in Cananda and have studied Islamic finance thoroughly as well. As I said above my position is squarely with Prouhdon. The Usury is the root of the growth requirement which you and I both share grave concerns about. For the Usury full enchelada Kreutz is the Babby as they say in Bristol.
          Kreutz has a book now published in English called the money syndrome
          Money is not Neutral for Kreutz and neither is it neutral to Steve Keen and countless and growing numbers of hetrodox economists.It was also seen as anything but neutral going back into the mists of time. Peak Ignorance on Money was probably around 2007 in the run up to the Great Crash happilly that is a peak we can be pleasedto have reached and passed, whilst some still cling to the cosy notion that Money creation and debt do not matter.
          If we had something other than money and something other than the Neo Liberal ( Classical Liberal ) Notion of the free Market perhaps money could be neutral but when one Knows the process of money creation intimately and has been exposed to some Hyman Minsky one wonders how the notion of moneys neutrality could remain in place.
          This is Steve Keens introduction lecture entitled The Alternative to Neo Liberalism
          If we continue to use money based metrics with usury being the price of money clive we will continue to falsely compare economic and socio economic choices against a flase metric. The Price of Natural electrical energies for instance is judged against notions of Internal rate of returns and Net Present Values which use interest rates as the basis of its discounting future monetary streams into present values.The Interest component for Public housing projects is something like 77%
          ”The capital share in garbage collection
          amounts to 12 % because here the share of capital costs
          is relatively low and the share of physical labor is particu-
          larly high. This changes in the provision of drinking water,
          where capital costs amount to 38 %, and even more so in
          social housing, where they add up to 77 %. On an aver-
          age we pay about 50% capital costs in the prices of our
          goods and services.”
          from http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~roehrigw/kennedy/english/chap1.htm
          In this Video Margeret Kennedy and others talk about the influence of Helmuth Kreutz on their own work.
          Democracy and devolution of power to communitites, complementary currencies promoting localisation as Shumcker famously said Small is Beautiful. It really is the Interest you know Clive, Compound interest and notions of exponential growth heve decoupled people from the Balance and synergies of our Natural environment.
        • I may have to cut along story short. You say you have read some of my posts. 29th May 2016? The neoliberals may be ruthless bastards, but they are unlikely to be stupid. It is in their own interests to evolve a culture like that of the Siane (See my book resume). I envisage something which will closely resemble Feudalism, but unlike under Feudalsim everybody, whatever their start in life, will have opportunities to rise through the ranks. Also no no ewill ber at risk of starving. I am unlikely to get a publisher to do a re-write of my book, but if I do, there will be a chapter in which I explain my conjecture that Feudalism and the Indian Caste system were responses to the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ where they had more time for manoeuvre than the Easter Islanders had. You can use theide if you quot eme as your source, and give people my blog address.
          There is much I could say aout money, but I am loth to spend all th etie necessary on your copious links. But you have given me a new insight – he potential conflict of interest between store of cvalue and means of excheange.
          But there are, or were, before we messed them up, ‘primitive’ tribeswhich either had no money, or if the did, could nevertheless use it within a sustainable culture. I stillhve difficulty in thinking of money as other than neutral per se.
          I have never had an answer I could make sense of from monetary reformers to two puzzles 1. Every time bad debt is written off, isn’t that the same as creating ‘debt free money’?
          2 Velocity of circulation Faster, where confidence and expectations are rising, is the same as more money creted isn’t it? similarly whenever expectations etc dip, the mony sully will contract willy nilly, and trying to increase it by Helicoptering or whatever is trying to push apiece of string. It will only work if it, or some other factor raises expectations at the same time. Positivists I have tried talking to just say yes, and go on as though velocity remained constant.
        • Hi Clive,
          This is a long answer because you ask two key questions which deserve a full explaination. I make no apologies for the links and quotes.
          The Beranrd Lietaer video at 1 hr and 9 minutes repays watching.
          1. You say.
          ”Feudalism and the Indian Caste system were responses to the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ where they had more time for manoeuvre than the Easter Islanders had”.
          There have been tragedies of mismanaged commons’ but The Tragedy of the commons as a category is too wide in my opinion , it is not inevitable.?
          Mono Culture and Diversity Leitear on Matrifocal or Hierarchical Patriarchal structures.
          Stresses efficiency breaks easily and is notrobust , Diversity and symbiosis is less efficient but mor robust we need permeculture and diverse systems and not mono cultures, a very basic ecological tennet which can be applied well to political economy and finance.
          2”.Potential conflict of interest between store of value and means of exchange´´.
          The conflict is not potential it is very real they are mutually exclusive functions.
          3. Every time bad debt is written off, isn’t that the same as creating ‘debt free money’?
          Repaid or written off debt destroys money as The asset is realised or rather liability is extinguished.Its a basic accounting identity explained by Graeber here.
          Money if understood in terms of a flow of credit that is secured by loans thereby creating money gives the best understanding of where money comes from and how it is extinguished. This partly helps with the second question on velocity of money which is a very good measure for cash and gets less clearly defined as one starts looking at asset financing and property financing which is of course a huge component of the money banks create, when one gets into derivatives the wheels really start to come off..
          Quiggley again.
          Money and Goods Are Different
          ”Thus, clearly, money and goods are not the same thing but are, on the contrary,
          exactly opposite things. Most confusion in economic thinking arises from failure to
          recognize this fact. Goods are wealth which you have, while money is a claim on wealth which you do not have. Thus goods are an asset; money is a debt. If goods are wealth;money is not wealth, or negative wealth, or even anti-wealth. They always behave in opposite ways, just as they usually move in opposite directions. If the value of one goes up, the value of the other goes down, and in the same proportion.”
          The Relationship Between Goods and Money Is Clear to Bankers
          In the course of time the central fact of the developing economic system, the
          relationship between goods and money, became clear, at least to bankers. Thisrelationship, the price system, depended upon five things: the supply and the demand for goods, the supply and the demand for money, and the speed of exchange between money and goods. An increase in three of these (demand for goods, supply of money, speed of circulation) would move the prices of goods up and the value of
          money down. This inflation was objectionable to bankers, although desirable to producers and merchants.On the other hand, a decrease in the same three items would be deflationary and would please bankers, worry producers and merchants, and delight consumers (who obtained more goods for less money). The other factors worked in the opposite direction, so that an increase in them (supply of goods, demand for money, and slowness of circulation or exchange) would be deflationary.”
          Relavant parts of Tragedy and hope are all extracted in the notes to my Poem Usury Hells Fuel Mans Oppressor.
          4. Velocity of circulation Faster, where confidence and expectations are rising, is the same as more money created isn’t it? similarly whenever expectations etc dip, the money supply will contract willy nilly, and trying to increase it by Helicoptering or whatever is trying to push apiece of string. It will only work if it, or some other factor raises expectations at the same time. Positivists I have tried talking to just say yes, and go on as though velocity remained constant.
          Velocity of Cash
          yes Credit creation is driven by banking expectations and borrowers appetites .
          Aggregate demand including Socio Economic decisions by community government and national government and then International trade.are key to how much demand can be realised
          ”The value of goods,
          expressed in money, is called “prices,” while the value of money, expressed in goods, is
          called “value.” p.49 (Commercial Capitalism) Quiqqley shows how Bankers make the distinction and real power lays in the Value of money and not the prices of goods.
          on how debt and credit creation effects aggregate demand is summed up in this argument. In my poem this is the not even wrong part.
          ”A counterfeit Nobel laureate, theres an irony.
          Denies that in money there can be a place that gertrude stein called there, home once but no longer there , there in Oakland. A precursor to some sub prime heritage.
          A speaker of truth to power could follow Pauli ´Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es is nicht einmal falsh!
          ”Not even wrong, not even there.
          All counterfeit, yet to counterfeit the counterfeit? a crime.
          What of the shepherd of this unruly nothing,
          where will they pen and fence this pack of wolves.
          Will they dress this pack of cards in sheep’s clothing.
          Limit the herd a need for Golden standards.
          Prudence of sound Money and even sounder usury.
          Fix the price and patronise those who will honour the thievery. A mechanism to harmonise silent ballot boxes.
          A gentlemen from belgium would complement his single currency. Unruled and unruly sets a course for austerity on a continent many times at war. A fight of 11 rounds.
          Spread like a cancer through the development of continents, enabling the killing called wars. That increase the debt and centralise the money power.
          Quiggly shewed the tragedy, little hope it seemed,
          blind faith in capitalisms harlot. That babylonian whore.
          At first a mere money trick for ragged trousered philanthropy. With usury, take away whats not even yet been paid. Ruskin would see wealth as that which is valuable in the hands of the valiant. Real goods sustain and wealth succours. Usurious money is but an unmade claim and worse. No banker has earned that newly minted note that hangs discordant in the air, as apt to rob as to pay.
          How obscure this obscurant cult of mammon.
          What smoke screened hall of mirrors.
          How obese and gluttonous the leviathan of usury.
          Austerity for the likes of you and I.
          More banqueting and evacuated vomit spews from the sceptred top table. Corrupt in patronage and jealousy of power. Overstuffed with greed and thirsty for more.”
          ”We argue that Keen’s definition of Aggregate Demand is more appropriate, especially if the role of credit creation by private banksin shaping macroeconomic dynamics is to be understood.
          We show how, in the simplified model we present, no growth can take place without the creation of credit by banks. The net change in the level of debt (what we call ‘Net Credit Creation’ = Credit Creation less Debt Repayment) is the single most important variable affecting the dynamics of the economy.”
          Story of the 11th Round.
          So how does a loan, whose interest is never created, get repaid?    In a static or declining system, it requires someone else’s principal being used. In other words, not creating the money to pay interest is the device used to generate the scarcity necessary for a bank-debt monetary system to function. It forces people to compete with each other for money that was never created, and penalizes them with bankruptcy should they not succeed. When the bank checks creditworthiness, it is really verifying their customers’ ability to compete successfully in the market place– that is to say, to obtain the money that is required to reimburse the principal and interest. Ultimately, someone must always lose.
          In the current national currency paradigm, one reason why so much attention is paid to central bank decisions is that increased interest rates necessitate more bankruptcies in the future. The economic pie must grow that much faster just to break even. The monetary system obliges us to incur debt and compete with others in order to perform exchanges and pay the resulting interest to the banks or lenders. No wonder “it is a tough world out there,” and that those who live within a competitive monetary system so readily accept Darwin’s supposed “survival of the fittest.” 
          Lietaers work on complementary currencies, WIR Bank in Switzerland and other local currency schemes is essential to providing a monetary measure by7 which externalities can be reflected and priced into investment and spending decisions.
          Margrit Kennedy: Interest and Inflation Free Money
          (Published by Seva International; ISBN 0-9643025-0-0;
          1. Four Basic Misconceptions About Money 15
          …First Misconception: There Is Only One Type of Growth 18
          …Second Misconception: We Pay Interest Only If We Borrow Money 24
          …Third Misconception: In the Present Monetary System
          We Are All Equally Affected by Interest 25
          …Fourth Misconception: Inflation Is an Integral Part of Free Market Economies 29
          Interest on money drives need for expansion.
          Reliance on one currency ( the dollar is a defacto gold standard.with no monetisation of an analogue for silver to provide circulation and a multiplier due to velocity.
          ”Patriarchal Value Coherence
          All patriarchal societies in history have had the tendency to impose
          a monopoly of asingle currency, hierarchically issued, naturally scarce or artificially kept scarce, and with positive interest rates. This was for instance the case in Sumer and Babylon, in Greeceand Rome, and from the Renaissance onwards in Western societies all the way to today.The form of these currencies has varied widely, ranging from standardized commodities, precious metals, paper or electronic bits. But what they all have in
          common is thatgovernments accepted only that specific currency for payment of taxes, that this currencycould be stored and accumulated, and that borrowing such currencies implied payment of interest. They all have in common Yang characteristics as illustrated in Figure 1.”
          Bernard Lietaer – Why money needs to change now!

     
  • rogerglewis 3:30 pm on August 21, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    Green Party Leadership, Update on the Odds. 

    This is not scientific as no reliable polling or statisically significant samples are available. Also turnout levels are purely speculation. 


    The Membership is 4 times the level that it was in 2012 when the Leadership was last contested that contest had a low turnout as well going back to 2008 the leadership has been secured on a low turnout and less than 3500 votes. how many of the 60,000 voting members will exercise their franchise this time, what drew the new membership to the Green Party? Natalie Bennet for sure but also Shahrar and Amelia all three through tireless work, but also the other candidates who stood in the record number of seats contested in the 2015 election, this is not a membership here at the feet of any one personality or executive position it is a diverse political party and a membership recently joined in the fray of active membership, a High turnout should I think be expected.

    The system used for the election is also the Single transferable Alternate Vote with six candidates and one seat. second third fourth and possibly 5th preferences may well play a very large part in this leadership election, If as I suspect the membership will want to maintain some stability and continuity not to say loyalty and thanks to the proven deputy team of Amelia and Shahrar. A respectable but not overwhelming level of support is the measured expectation of the Coronation Couple, hope and expect to remain a republic my fellow Greens.

    So then to the Candidates Clive , Simon Marty and the Davids, DaveM and DaveW. if as a member you want 1 leader and 2 deputies thats the choice if the co leader option is taken its just 1 deputy and as  I have already said I think thats a huge waste of real political capital and wilfull destrucion of a dynamic that works with a proven track record.

    With enlarged Membership, an expectation of a high turnout and the strong base for Shahrar and Amelia, the Coronation ticket might not even be top at the first ballot, with preference choices coming in from eliminated candidates my bet is the co leadership bid will be eliminated in round 3 or 4 with the two davids in a close outcome that could go either way by round 5, bizarrely the second and third choices of those placing Lucas and Bartley first on their ballots may well prove the decisive block of votes. Will the royalists RON? should be the question on all of our lips?



    Assumptions.


    Total Size of Electorate 60,000
    Expected turnout 40%
    Votes to Count 24000
    No Of Possible Ballot combinations. 49X49 = 2401
    Quota 50% + 1 = 12001 votes to win
    You can play around with secenarios your selves, see the Voting in the 2012 contest to see how those votes transfered in different rounds.




    Assumptions.


    Total Size of Electorate 60,000
    Expected turnout 40%
    Votes to Count 24000
    No Of Possible Ballot combinations. 49X49 = 2401
    Quota 50% + 1 = 12001 votes to win.
    In this scenario Underdog no1 (Malone) would win, Williams could easily be substituted and called Underdog 2, key is the RON vote and the Alternate preferences that transfer as each round progresses. This is a game anyone can play and see the online interactive graphing tool below.


    Round 1
    8000 2000 5000 6000 1001 900 1100
    Bartley/Lucas RON Malone Williams Warin Cross Lord
    RON
    Malone
    Williams
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord 100
    Bartley/Lucas
    Malone
    Williams
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley/Lucas 100
    RON
    WIlliams
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley/Lucas
    Ron 300
    Malone
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley/Lucas
    RON
    Malone 200
    Williams
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley Lucas
    RON
    Malone
    Williams 200
    Warin
    Round 2
    8100 2300 5200 6200 1001 1200
    Bartley/Lucas RON Malone Williams Warin Lord
    RON
    Malone
    Williams
    Warin
    Cross
    Bartley/Lucas
    Malone
    Williams
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord 50
    RON
    WIlliams
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley/Lucas 100
    Malone
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley/Lucas
    RON 50
    Williams
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley Lucas
    RON
    Malone 801
    Warin
    Round 3
    8200 2350 6001 6200 1250
    Bartley/Lucas RON Malone Williams Lord
    RON
    Malone
    Williams
    Warin
    Bartley Lucas 100
    Malone
    Williams
    Warin
    Cross
    Ron 100
    WIlliams
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Malone 1000
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley/Lucas
    Willliams 50
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley Lucas
    RON
    warin
    Round 4
    8300 2450 7001 6250
    Bartley/Lucas RON Malone Williams
    RON
    Malone 1450
    Williams
    Warin
    Malone
    Williams 1000
    Warin
    Cross
    WIlliams
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Warin
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley/Lucas
    Cross
    Lord
    Bartley Lucas
    RON
    Round 5
    8300 8451 7250
    Bartley/Lucas Malone Williams
    RON
    Williams
    Warin
    Malone
    Warin
    Cross
    WIlliams
    Cross
    Lord
    Warin
    Lord
    Bartley/Lucas 3250
    Cross
    Bartley Lucas
    Malone 4000
    Malone wins 12451 Votes
    Lucas Bartley 11550 votes
    This on line electoral system modelling tool is a good way of seeing how the alternative transferable preference can make a big diffference in multi candidate instant run off voting. The screen capture is not interactive the link takes you to an interactive on line tool.
    This scenario is just for fun and pure speculation to illustrate how transferable votes before or after RON will make a big difference in a STV race with several candidates.
    This Video Is a very good Expalination of the system too.
    Good Luck to all the candidates and rememebr RON is a valid democratic choice and can be a powerful tool to ensure more diversity by securing the #GreenPistols in Office.

    Get your Tickets here.

     
  • rogerglewis 5:06 pm on August 17, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    David Malone Green PArty Leadership Site – Home 

    David Malone Green PArty Leadership Site – Home

     
  • rogerglewis 5:06 pm on August 17, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    David Malone Green PArty Leadership Site – Home 

    David Malone Green PArty Leadership Site – Home

     
  • rogerglewis 4:44 pm on August 9, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    Champagne Socialists For Corbyn. 

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js The Cutting is from my press cutting book, I am one of the fortunate ones. I recieved a grant aided education in Comprehensive, and for A levels at the Colchester Institute where I went back to take my A Levels after leaving home and having dropped out of sixth form. Incidentally one of my A Level Law Lecturers was Mike O´Brien a Junior Home office minister in the naughties New Labour Government, but at that time 1982, was a Law Lecturer at The Colchester Institute. But thats another story.

    I went to South Bank poly and studied one of the most Conservative subjects you can, Estate Management majoring in Valuation. I am a trained Neo Liberal Capitalist but heres the thing I am a life Long Socialist. I know that my opportunities in Life and my most prized possesion , My education, are owed to the sweat blood and tears of my Grand Parents generation in the fisrt half of the 20th Century and largely down to the Labour Goivernment of 1946 that bequeathed to us the NHS, National Insurance and the Education act.
    I made good use of my education in one of the most conservative of professions qualifying as a chartered surveyor , becoming a sucessful property consultant and Estate Agent and also a Property developer. I am grateful  for the luck I had but mostly acknowledge and am thankful for the opportunities that the state education system allowed me to pursue. I see those opportunities are diminishing where they still exist today ,for people of similar backgrounds and education opportunities as the younger me. My ex wife was the same she became a successful commercial lawyer. We both always voted labour, heres a blog about the Elelctions we sat through the night to ultimate dissappointment through out the Thatcher years.
    When I see Tom watson insulting comrades who still fight to maintain opportunities to benefit people like me who go on to uncomplainingly  pay their taxes when they meet with success. We should  always remember that all success is achieved stood on the shoulders of Giants, most of who went and still go un-rewarded. Those selfless and un acknowledged heroes and heroines that  still did and still do what they do so that others will not have to and did not  have to. Well when I hear Watson and others critisise those who I thank and always remember made a sacrifice for me and others.We have a commitment always to pay back and not kick away the ladder.  I get Angry and not a little confused

    By 2015 I had had enough of New/Blu Labour, from 2008 after which I lost much of my personal wealth , read the very first Blog on this site for the story of all of that. I twigged that Labour Blu or new or Austeruity light with its promised end to boom and bust and all that was not Labour anymore, it was new or Blu or something else but it certainly was missing the Labour and the all important Socialism bit.  I supported the Greens, I still do but I am a Labour Party Socialist and see that the truth about the Election in 2015 is not all about the bloody voters of Nuneaton. Watch this video for an explaination about how its a bit more complicated than that and why The Greens and UKIP are right about the illusion of choice represented by the Two Horse race of First Past the post. Democracy is not working.

    Now pay attention heres the Boundary commision stuff and the reason why Labour needs to get together with Left and democratic parties(including UKIP, Plaid and the SNP) to get the Oligarchic Tories out of the picture.

     In 2015 I made this comment to Owen Jones of the Guardian.

    Owen, I had an on off discussion over the course of the last General Election with the Red Labour page on Face Book. I decided to vote green as the Greens were basically offering a form of socialism I related to and Labour were not. In the current leadership debate we see that Labour has gone back to the right and that is very difficult given that the Neo Liberal domination of the debate has really re cast what Centre is more along US lines where there is really just different shades of Elitist Right where of course something can be approximated as a Centre of the homogenous technocratic whole. You Made a Post suggesting that Labour needs to learn a new language ´´Spanish´´and of course Podemos. Witness also Syrzia in Greece and Tsparis’s letter published today warning of the Neo Liberal Technocracy destroying any idea of sovereign democracy. The EU debate will be interesting In or out, the arguments for staying in seem to me to be wholly technocratic and corporate in nature and of Course Stirling remaining independent which is a Corporate benefit outwith the Corporate benefits of the Euro. For me the Greens Monetary reform policies were the main reason I decided to support them after a life time as a Labour Supporter. Capitalism in the neo liberal form is very extreme, I am a Socialist informed by Anarchist ideals of decentralised stake-holding communities in line with Krotopkins ideas of Mutual Aid the soul of the common good of society. The Neo Liberal idea of mutuality and common good is to deny they have any purpose other than to act as an anchor dragging back the power of Capital A Labour Party is a contradiction in terms where it serves first and foremost the Interests of Capital which are at odds with those of Atomised Labour. Notwithstanding difficulties with Democracy itself is there any Democracy without balanced representation? the question of Money and Markets as a central consideration of policy makes the tool the master, you will be aware of Nick Hanauers Ted Talk in which he says Neo Liberalism has the Market and wealth creation process backwards and has done for over 30 years. Positive Money and Economists like Steve Keen have shown the contradictions in the Neo Liberal narrative as have plenty of others. The base of the problem is and always has been the Money Creation monopoly ceded to Private banking interests on and off since the 1700’s to tackle this question we need to refer to Marx, David Harvey is an excellent starting point that wishes to understand Financialised Capitalism and how power concentrates into the hands of Bankers inevitably. What I would like to see you doing Owen is bringing the Money creation process into the understanding of those who’s interests it works against with a Mutualised money creation process a lot of inequality through self serving private interests will be stopped and real questions of the priorities of society as a whole will be more clearly described and delineated. Have a look at Positive money and Give Ben Dyson its founder a telephone call, I sincerely believe that this is where the Interests of Labour and their families will be answered best and an issue around which a new Standard for ordinary folk to rally will be found. http://www.positivemoney.org/issues/debt/ Both Dianne Abbot and Michael Meacher attended the first debate on the issue of Money creation in the House of Commons Late last year, there is a caucus of Socialist Labour MP’s who really ought to think of starting something new or defecting to the Greens and forcing By Elections.

     Sunday, 1 March 2015 On The May 2015 UK ELection. 

    On the the May 2015 Election, Bear in mind that if you wish to see some policy from Central Government or indeed Local Government that answers the needs and wants of the regular citizen i.i me and you! Politicians have to be made accountable. By Voting for Mainstream Parties one effectively resigns one self to the model described in the Quotes below ( quotes from Roy Madron​, Super Competent Democracies). ‘Democracy is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote’.” Joseph Schumpeter, Quoted from Roy Madron , Super Competent Democracies who in turn Cites. “Participation, and Democratic Theory” by Carole Pateman. Dr. Pateman says that, Schumpeter and his followers: … set the current Anglo-American political system as our democratic ideal (with) a ‘democratic theory’ that in many respects bears a strange resemblance to the anti-democratic arguments of the last (i.e. 19th) century. No longer is democratic theory centered on the participation of ‘the people’; in the contemporary theory of democracy it is the participation of the minority elite that is crucial and the non-participation of the apathetic, ordinary man lacking in the feelings of political efficacy, that is regarded as the main bulwark against instability.´´ I highly recommend that anyone that wishes to work out the game that New Labour now plays and why , should try to get hold of a Copy of Roys book, any progressive publishers out there should get in touch with Roy and do a UK edition if he is amenable. And this,

    Monday, 13 April 2015 Paying for promises, 

    The trump card of seniorage. One of the hugely overlooked parts of Green Economic policy is the restoration of money creation to the Exchequers account this is a huge saving on the present privatised system which is one that has happened by default or stealth depending on your viewpoint. Check out policy EC661 The Green Party believes that, as the means of exchanging goods and services, the stock of money is a vital common resource which should be managed in the public interest. Yet only 3% of our money supply currently exists in the form of notes and coins issued by the Government or the Bank of England. 97% of the money circulating in the economy takes the form of credit that is created electronically by private banks through the accounting processes they follow when they make loans. for an idea of the full extent of tax payer value of such a policy see. http://www.positivemoney.org/issues/taxes/ From 2002 to 2009, banks increased the amount of money in the UK by £1 trillion through lending (with every new loan creating new money). Because this money was created by banks, it’s the banks that get the benefit from it (in this case, the interest received on £1 trillion of additional loans). If the government had created this money instead of the banks, taxpayers would have been able to pay up to £1 trillion less taxes: approximately £33,000 for every person who pays income tax over just 7 years.[1]

     Go to the April 2015 tabs in the menu for various mumblings I issued during the General election. As with all of us on politics I could go on But this is my experience, I am a Socialist, I am an Ex PAt, I am not a Tax exile, I know a lot about Capitalism, I oppose Capitalism because I am a Socialist, and more than that I abhor Neo Liberal Ideology. Read Roy Madron for why neo liberalism is our common enemy if we are democrats, One Nation Tories or Labour men and women , read David Malone’s Golem XIV blog for the real story on neo liberal economics and its Voodoo ideology. Social Democracy is good Democratic Socialism is better (YMMV). Blair and Blairites are Neo Liberal, they are the Labour Party entryists. So lower the Ladder comrades opportunity for all not just the 5%.

     
  • rogerglewis 5:47 am on August 9, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    Currents of the tides, Time and the nature of things, pass. 

    Göring the Organ-Grinder  and  Heidegger the Monkey. Jud Evans Cartoons Here.(see Purple Link)
    Göring the Organ-Grinder  and  Heidegger the Monkey. Jud Evans Cartoons Here.(see Purple Link)
    This post is about rediscovering old sources, a thing called the Web Archive, I was delighted to have it recommended regarding a site which used to make me laugh, a satire site on Capitalism and the necessity for debt in modern political economy.
    The site was called The Melt Fund, and the site now, is again, sort of resurrected.
    Here it is maybe it will make you Laugh or perhaps like others it will make you angry.
    Other ghosts of christmas past are some long lost business Web sites. One in particular which I was very proud of at the time and still am in fact. Rarely do we have the chance to look back and see where we did something ahead of its time and I genuinely belive the East14.Com project, its conception and also its excecution was ahead of its time. The web site is still remarkably fresh.
    Well see for your self.
    From the Career siide of things heres my old consultancy firm web site from 2000 as well.
    And from my brief life as Lord of the manor you might find this web site 
    of some passing interest.
    But the jewell of this new found time machine is the discovery of the collected philisophical reference source and various formal and informal writing of the great

    eliminativist Philosopher and Linguist Jud Evans. Jud and I were correspondents by e mail and interlocuters here on Linked in in the now defunct philosophy group.

    When Jud died in 2013 I made two blog posts in his memory both are updated in my Blogg here.
    (9th August 2016) on discovering an internet archive of Juds evans-experientialism web site(Link at end of Quote from Juds Essay Requiem.

    Jud I thought had gone but on discovering the eternal archive of Evans Experienalism he tells me he and his late first wife are still sitting on a bench half-way up 4000 steps in Minori, Amalfi.

    ” In the early afternoon, half way down, close to a wayside religious shrine, we came across a seat for weary travellers. Gratefully we stopped for refreshment. Quietly we sat together eating our meal of sandwiches, delicious tomatoes and green olives. We flushed it down with dark red country wine. The fragrance of the herbs and wild flowers, which surrounded us, was an overpowering and heady mix. Sitting closely together, my arm around her thin shoulders, we gazed out at the stupendous views of the sea and the coast, which spread out below us in both directions. We could see the ribbon of the coastal road that winds its way between Sorrento to Salerno in the distance. Those moments there in the sun were electric. They were charged with a rare and special potency. We were caught in an immortal continuum. It was as if time had stopped and snared us in continuum of experience. I was enwrapped with my lovely wife in an ever-redeemable present. We’ll never leave that place. Time has suspended us there together in an immortal duality. Perhaps one day you’ll tread that path down to Minori. You may chance upon that traveller’s bench. You’ll see us sitting there together, as we always are and as we always will be, gazing silently out to sea. There we’ll remain always, until the warm winds and gentle Mediterranean rains have completed their work of erosion and Ravello and the mountain are no more”.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20030516233701/http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/writing04.htm

    Jud amongst other things I have been happily reading as if talking directly with an old friend we did speak on Skype once or twice strangely about web proxy´s 
    for some purpose that I do not recall. But he recommends this his favourite poem by TS Elliot.
    Burnt Norton
    Time present and time past
    Are both perhaps present in time future
    And time future contained in time past.
    If all time is eternally present
    All time is unredeemable.
    What might have been is an abstraction
    Remaining a perpetual possibility
    Only in a world of speculation.
    What might have been and what has been
    Point to one end, which is always present.
    Footfalls echo in the memory
    Down the passage which we did not take
    Towards the door we never opened
    Into the rose-garden. My words echo
    Thus, in your mind.
                                       But to what purpose
    Disturbing the dust on a bowl of rose-leaves
    I do not know.
                                       Other echoes
    Inhabit the garden. Shall we follow?
    The Present Moment – 1960
    It is by no means as easy as it may look to live in the immediate present.  It requires a high degree of awareness of one’s self.  The less I am conscious of myself as the ‘one who’s in charge’ – the more unfree and automatic I am – the less I am aware of the immediate present.
          I remember when I worked in a telecommunications factory labouring on an extremely boring repetitive task.  I was so alienated, it was as if I were someone else.  I felt as if I was a million miles away from what I was doing.  I was in a daze, or as though in a dream.   The job was so simple that a monkey could have done it – it required no amount of concentration at all.  It was as if there was a wall between the present and me. It is often useful I find, to ask myself, “What am I experiencing at this very moment?” or “Where am I – what is most significant to me at this present moment?”
          I’ll tell you what has sparked off this musing about that slippery, eel-like state of the present.  I’ve just been re-reading my favourite poem of all time – ‘Burnt Norton‘ from ‘The Four Quartets’ by T.S. Eliot.  For me, the poem evokes my youth, when I was stumbling towards some kind of spiritual awareness of what it is like to be a thinking human being.  Although written by an American – a very cultured, anglicised, American, from that most English of American States – Massachusetts – it is quintessentially an English poem.
    The poem deals with the problem of time – trying to pin down the un-pindownable (a neologism newly coined at this precise moment in the present!).
    I wish Jud was still around to make suggestions and comments on my latest poetry, he was a mentor a teacher and a freind
    Tides of the Dollar Moon
    A planet to its Star must look
    The planet no less needs its moon.
    As the Sun is the store of energy, New.
    The moon drives and regulates currents,
    of the tides , time and the nature of things.
    That Golden Orb gives all
    That silvery Moon regulates all
    Both work together even as the other
    Seemingly sleeps and yet currents
    of the tides, Time and the nature of things pass.
    On the nature of Man made things
    On a standard of gold which
    Jennings would not be crucified upon ,
    That cross Of Gold-alone hard food of Midas.
    No tides to complement the Orb
    For Silver was its currency,
    the Silvery moon to that crosses Golden Sun
    which means of exchange fed the common man
    The Silver Moon drives and regulates
    Currencies of the tides, Time and the nature of things.
    Time passed and Man forsakes the Golden Orb
    and its silvery moon. No credit he gave
    to drivers of Tides, Time and the nature of things
    Fiat of imperial rule enforces debts,
    new tides in political Economy.
    FIAT dictates the new tides of Commerce.
    Ephors of debt above and astride the law.
    No silvery moon complementary to the Golden Orb.
    There are no tides by means of which the common man
    may be fed. Hard food of Midas alone- Starvation.
    King Kanute Like those ephors
    wave bidding the advancing tide backwards
    Still they advance tides in a tsunami of debt
    Tides of a Dollar moon by fiat
    Hegemonic Tides of the Dollar Moon.
    Roger G Lewis (2016)
     
  • rogerglewis 4:59 am on August 9, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    Posthumous Guest Post. Jud Evans (RIP).Jud Lays out His epistemological Position in all its glory. (Repost from June 2013, updated links to Juds writings and intellectual legacy) 

    Reposted in memory of Jud and to point folk remembering and still learning from Jud to where they CAN FIND HIS WEB SITE NOW.

    I am confident that this is what I should be doing upon this discovery, Jud still speaks now through his web site as here and it is clear he intended and wanted people to encounter him in his writing and to share his discoveries and enjoyments in philosophy and language.

    According to my theory, which is only in its infancy, my potential readership is immense and will continue to increase exponentially or on a compound basis as the years go by. My hypothesis goes as follows: I have arranged with my solicitor, that upon my death, eight professionally bound bindings of my ‘Florilegium’ (literary flowers) or collected works are to be produced and one given to each of my children.

    With the interest in family history increasing in leaps and bounds, my children may also have these textual heirlooms copied electronically, or in other form or forms as yet undeveloped. I hope that my grandchildren will do the same for their children.

    I hope that they will be able to make sense of the literary snowflakes that the blizzard of my creation wafts their way and that they will be able to scrape a pathway to some sort of understanding of my world as I saw it around me. If each succeeding generation passes on my words, and all my ancestors continue to see value in preserving my scribblings, then the potential readership could be represented by 32,768 persons, only fifteen generations from now, that is in four hundred years time. This number will be squared, to well over one thousand million persons say, a thousand years hence. Fantasy? Yes, of course it is – but it’s good fun!

    But by thaime, [in a thousand year’s time –  it’s hoped that the somewhat Pepysianesque documents will have gained so much historical interest, the readership will have overflowed to the general public, so far greater numbers could be involved.

    Jud( George) Evans 1935-2013 RIP I learned a lot from Jud Jud Evans • PART ONE

     MORALITY AS AN ILLUSION

     Jan Writes:
    As we can not seem to open you on the subject of ethics, as Harvey lately tried, though calling it metaphysics.

     Jud: Man is supposed to realise that the reifications “morals” and “ethics” are basically an illusion. The reification “morals” is simply an abstract umbrella-word denoting the societal downward imposition of opinions regarding behaviour favourable to the dominant classes upon the general masses at a particular period of history.

     However, it is true that I did promise you a piece on ethics and here it is.

     Morality as an Illusion.
    “Is morality no more than a collective illusion fobbed off on us by our genes for reproductive ends?” [1] (Ruse1986)

     The meta-ethical question Ruse raises imparts a new vitality and energy to the ethical discourse and introduces exciting possibilities of a socio-biological nature that may underlie Mary Midgley’s version of the origin of ethics. Midgley identifies morality as a group response to the conflict-ridden primal clashes and natural disasters associated by the traditional religious myths describing the origin of the universe and the early days of humankind. The chaos can only be overcome if human beings live by moral rules which curb and frustrate some of their desires. [2] (Midgely. 1993. p. 3.) So what is the nature of these rules?

     People look at the rules, compare them, and eventually question the point of morality itself.

     Doris Schroeder (my old professor) has characterised evolutionary ethics as arguing that natural selection has instilled human beings with a moral sense and a disposition to be good. On this basis morality could be understood as a phenomenon that arises automatically during the evolution of sociable, intelligent beings and not, as theologians or philosophers might argue, as the result of divine revelation or the application of our rational faculties. [3] (Schroeder)

     Combining Ruse’s question and Schroeder’s outline I have structured my piece in the following way:

     I. GENES AS A TELEOLOGICAL AGENCY?

     II. GENETICAL TELEOLOGY OR TELEONOMY?

     III. THE DYNAMIC OF APPOSITIVE TENDENCIES .

     IV. WHY DOES NATURE FAVOUR GOODNESS?

     I. GENES AS A TELEOLOGICAL AGENCY?

     Is humanity’s moral nature manifested as a mere practical result or consequence of some species specific inherent disposition towards morality, as posited by Midgley’s traditionalist approach, or does mankind’s ethical nature operate as a feature of a hidden telic agenda with our genes acting as covert agential enforcers which further the cosmic program of some deity or unknown force?

     Is the personification of DNA fragments known as *The Selfish Gene* a viable theory? The abstraction “selfish”, certainly sounds scientifically louche when applied to uncomprehending cellular material wherein no psychic activity takes place. But as Andrew Brown writes in “The Science of Selfishness” for Dawkins the word means: ‘The quality of being copied by a Darwinian selection process.’ ‘Evolutionary preferentiality’ perhaps No, ‘The Selfish Gene’ is a brilliant title for a best seller. The title is a marketing device which instantiates the core idea. Dawkins is aware of the implicature. It is very doubtful if a book with the title: *The Genetic Quality Of Being Copied By A Darwinian Selection Process.” would have sold half so many copies. ‘You don’t see something until you have the right metaphor to let you perceive it.’
    (Shaw, ‘echoing Thomas S. Kuhn’ in Gleick, 1988.) [4] (Brown. 1998 )

     References.

     [1] Ruse Michael. Taking Darwin Seriously. Oxford: Blackwell; 1986.

     [2] Midgley. Mary. ‘The origin of ethics’ 1993. p. 3. A Companion to Ethics. Blackwell Companions to Philosophy.

    [3] Schroeder. Doris. Evolutionary Ethics.2006. http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/evol- eth.htm

    [4] Brown,. Andrew. 1998. “The Science of Selfishness.” Salon 21st.
    7 months ago
    • Like
    1
    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • PART TWO
    Can it be that what we refer to as *morality* is really a feature of an evolutionary stabilising stratagem based upon opinion-forming genes? Do the articulations of our selfish replicators contain the DNA scripts of more just the obvious physical characteristics of our forebears, and encode the scripts for our behavioural relations with our fellow men too?

     I believe they do, but not in the crude format of animal instinct-bearing genes with hard-wired scripts for nest-building, web-spinning, dam construction. Human genetic scripts respond to the unique catenulate history of the individual and provide subtle experientially tweaked behavioural preferences, rather than strict directions which can be thought of as set-in-stone pre-dispositional inclinations to interpret situations in a particular way as in many animals

    GENETICAL TELEOLOGY OR TELEONOMY?

    Descriptions of the phenomena of teleology use of ultimate purpose or design as a means of explaining phenomena. Belief in the perception of purposeful development toward an end. Theologically it is the doctrine that all things are designed by God.

     Biologically it is the theory or study of organic development as caused by the ‘purposes’ which things serve. And what are these ‘purposes’ we may ask? Surely, to rely on some unspecified concept like ‘purposes’ is not to answer the question at all, but to leave it open-ended?

     If God is excluded teleologically it applies to ends that are planned by some natural agent which can preview with intention, purpose and foresight possible evolutionary improvable models of various human biological and ethical futures? Surely this abstract representation of a quality or idea as a person is not what genetical bioethics had in mind?

     As a theory the teleonomical explanation is an improvement which goes halfway to answering the question of a supposed developmental anticipated outcome. Teleonomy is the quality of apparent purposefulness and of goal-directedness of structures and functions in living organisms that derive from their evolutionary history and adaptation for reproductive success. Well, at least this cuts out the personification of teleology but it too seems to be ducking the question by offering evolutionary functionalism to explain the evolutionary function?

     Theoretical descriptions of the possible processes that initiated the teleonomical process have recently been advanced. An interesting one is: ‘On the Chemical Nature and Origin of Teleonomy’ by Addy Pross of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, in Israel. [5] Pross. 2005)

     The paper addresses the nature the physico-chemical of teleonomic events and the processes by which teleonomic systems could emerge from non- teleonomic systems. He speculates that teleonomic (purposeful) chemical events are those whose primary directive is discerned to be non-thermodynamic, while regular (non- teleonomic – non-purposeful events) are those whose primary directive is the traditional thermodynamic one, involving the conversion of different forms of energy.

    For the archetypal teleonomic event which is cell multiplication, the non- thermodynamic directive can be identified as being a kinetic directive. It is

    concluded, therefore, that the process of emergence, whereby non-teleonomic replicating chemical systems were transformed into teleonomic ones, involves a switch in the primacy of thermodynamic and kinetic directives.

     He proposes that the step where that transformation took place was the one in which some pre-metabolic replicating system acquired an energy-gathering capability, thereby becoming metabolic. The analysis builds on previous work that considers living systems to be a kinetic state of matter as opposed to the traditional thermodynamic states that dominate the inanimate world.

    7 months ago
    • Like
    1
    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • PART THREE

     Ontologically my own theory of non- teleological change can be explicated thus.

     The cosmos is an unbounded infinite complexity of interacting matter. The total cosmos is indestructible matter. The idea of a vacuum is a myth. All matter is in constant change – No change equals – no existence. Material is self-regulatory. (many self-regulatory material processes involve huge time spans by human standards. The spontaneous interaction of matter is a existential factor of its presence.

     A teleonomic process, such as evolution, produces complex products without guiding foresight. Evolution gradually accumulates hindsight, as variations unwittingly make “predictions” about structures and functions which could successfully cope with the future, and participate in an audition which culls the also- rans, leaving winners for the next generation. Information accumulates about functions and structures that are successful, exploiting feedback from the environment via the selection of fitter coalitions of structures and functions. Teleonomy is related to past effects instead of present purpose.

     For (Lorenz, 1996) Life is characterised by “a special structure which is moulded by evolution to make probable the gain of energy and to exploit highly specific sources of energy”. Information in common parlance means relevant, teleonomically organised information that has a meaning for the organism receiving or possessing it”.

     WHY DOES NATURE FAVOUR GOODNESS?

     I share the view that ‘morality’ incorporates a group’s evolutionarily engendered strategic attitudes or pragmatic opinions selected or sanctioned by nature as being beneficial for stable species-specific biological development. On this basis ‘ethics’ belongs to the domain of science not philosophy.

     A feature of the diachronic nature of philosophy is the gradual reduction of its corpus, as various subjects of study, like mathematics, geography, chemistry, history, medicine, politics and sociology etc., have established and constituted themselves into independent domains of science and the humanities and hived off as independent disciplines.

     As my old Prof Schroeder points out, this is certainly the view of Edward O. Wilson, the ‘father’ of the new science of sociobiology, who believes that “scientists and humanists should consider together the possibility that the time has come for ethics to be removed temporarily from the hands of the philosophers and bio-logicised” (Wilson, 1975: 27).

     The challenge for evolutionary biologists such as is to define “goodness” with reference to evolutionary theory and then explain why human beings ought to be good.

    Descriptively (rather than analytically) speaking, for the average human singleton who does not give much thought to these matters, the term ‘ethics’ characterises the individual’s acceptance, rejection or acquiescence towards a group’s prescriptive, ethically generalist opinions, regarding a set of accepted principles of right conduct.

    For the human individual, actions and attitudes considered ‘moral’ are those opinions or principles conforming to standards of what is right within the social group or society with which he identifies himself. Such a correlation of opinion also includes personal beliefs or judgments regarding how we should treat the environment within which the individual and the group exist. 7 months ago • Like
    1
    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • PART FOUR

     THE DYNAMIC OF APPOSITIVE TENDENCIES

     Inherent within such a ‘one to many – many to one ‘relationship are two dynamical appositive tendencies. Mankind’s primitive instincts often militate against the good of the group. The ethical memory-tissue is pulled in two diametrical directions – the individual good – as opposed to the *other* or ‘group good.’ If an equilibria of appositive precepts is experienced for any prolonged period angst and frustration may occur.

     The material universe exists and must exist in a fashion which complies with the physical realities of how of matter exists- that is kinetically. To be kinetic involves change – change presupposes modes of change – modes of change presuppose ordered rather than chaotic change. If chaotic change was materially possible we would not exist and the cosmos would be a chaotic mess. The cosmos is not a chaotic mess and we exist – therefore only ordered change is possible. Ordered change is what humans mean when the refer to *nature* or ‘the laws of physics.’ Therefore ‘ordered change’ or ‘nature’ is simply the way the universe exists

     ANIMAL INSTINCT AND HUMAN PREDISPOSITIONAL WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?

     There is a conflictual tension produced between the individual’s egoistical desires, and his/her perceived obligation to comply with the evolutionary stabilising strategies of his fellows which are designed to promote group equilibria. This tendency to impel the individual towards adopting strategies considered more beneficial to the person rather than the group operates via adaptive dynamics. Such responses often take the form of pretence or covert immoral behaviour. Lying (including self-deception and ‘white lies’.) are quite common. In the extreme there is sometimes a complete and overt rejection of the particular moral constraints involved.

     In order for a moral strategy to be considered sequentially sensible a belief is required, but the belief in a moral systematic plan of action is most often conditional. It is expected to maximize a reciprocatory engendered pay off in terms of personal, sexual, group or societal stability. In the absence of a constancy of benefits individuals and the state institute a tit-for-tat policy or an equivalent given in return agenda is often instituted, which in personal relationships can lead to displacement activity or the dissolution of the moral contract and an end of the relationship. In societal terms such a lack of a reciprocatory generated pay-off often ends in society withdrawing from the moral contract and excluding the individual by imprisonment or taking other punitive action.

    Though contemporary societies have moved on from the biblical style ‘eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth’ models, our current administration of moral justice is based upon the idea that a moral agent who breaks the moral codes and courses suffering to others is made to suffer too via the moral agency of the justice system.

     Perhaps the close connection between morality and religion, the equilibrious effect of an authoritative control mechanism is thus revealed? Perhaps this explains inter- religious rivalries and hatreds to a large extent? If ethical hegemony is a function of natural selection, any other moral system perceived as an alternative or threat to that to group cohesion would be identified as an adversary.

    It is important to qualify exactly what genetical encoding actually implies, and whether the implication present in the question of an deceiving genome bent upon foisting on to us a teleologically contrived biological agenda holds any water? Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection, teaches us that a instinctual trait, which favours survival will be selected via competition. To be considered instinctual a behaviour must be: Automatic b) Irresistible c) Occurrent d) Unmodifiable e) Event-actuated

     The absence of one or more of these criteria indicates that the behaviour is not fully instinctual. 7 months ago • Like

    1
    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • PART FIVE
    If these criteria are used in a rigorous scientific manner, then strictly speaking the application of the term “instinct” cannot be used in reference to human behaviour. When terms, such as mothering, territoriality, eating, mating, and so on, are used to denote human behaviour they are seen to not meet the severe criteria listed above. In comparison to animal behaviour such as hibernation, migration, nest building, mating and so on that are clearly instinctual, no human behaviour meets the necessary criteria. In other words, under this definition, there are no human instincts but rather pre-dispositional preferences.

     That there exists an inborn hard-wired pattern of behaviour often responsive to specific stimuli resulting in predictable behaviour in animals is an accepted fact. Key stimuli initiate innate releasing mechanisms. Neurological imprinting causes geese to follow around the first moving object that they encounter, as it tends to be their mother. A firefly travels miles to home in on the female pheromones carried by the wind – you see a juicy veggie-burgher – your mouth waters etc.

    But that alone is not enough to say that there is any evidence that moral strategies are genetically encoded.

     It is arguable that we are born with predispositional traits which equip us to recognise, learn and inaugurate so-called ‘moral’ strategies considered to be biologically advantageous during the course of our lives. It is also true that instinctual behaviours which are in fact biologically self-serving behaviours calculated to realise biologically advantageous opportunities could be mistaken for ‘moral behaviours.’

    The man who assists the blind person across the road and drops a five- pound note in the beggar’s cap might act in such a way as to impress his female companion in order to insinuate himself into her bed. All organisms have constitutional dispositions towards particular behaviours.

    The obvious ones are courtship behaviour, nest building and protection strategies. Those who have been harried by gulls when walking near their nests will have personal experience of this, as will any game- warden who has approached a
    female elephant who has recently calved. Instincts are inherited patterned, fixed action responses to certain kinds of stimuli they are almost certainly reinforced by repetition. 7 months ago
    • Like
    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • PART SIX
    Human emotional responses form a basis for arousal to outside stimuli but they can be countervailed by cognitive processes based upon moral strategies based upon considerations of delayed satisfaction, fear or a desire to preserve a group or societal stability.

    I do hold that predispositional, instinctual behaviour such as the care and protection of one’s young ( the couriers of one’s patrimonial genetic endowment) is hard- wired into the human animal and that our genes have developed in the way that they have through naturally selected for the promotion of reproductive ends.

    In the limited sense that morality is an illusion of course I agree with Ruse’s comments.

     Where I disagree strongly with Ruse regards his suggestion that our genes fob us off with our concept of ‘morality’ in order to conceal an underlying carnal agenda or sexual dimension of good behaviour. I do not believe that our genes have developed stratagems designed to falsely present human reproduction as morals.

     Evolution is an unconscious, incognisant, uncaring, unplanned process. If it were true, that genes used morals as a cloak for sex then ironically it would position the very advocates and organisations which urge decent moral behaviour upon us as the very ones promoting strategies leading to sexual behaviour – that such sexual intercourse should remain within the parameters of couplings sanctioned by the church makes little difference to the incongruity of such a situation for the Rusean message:

    ‘Be nice to others and you will get more nookie,’ has the same message whichever way you look at it.

     A phenotype describes any observed quality of an organism, such as its morphology, development, or behaviour. In my view ethical particularism is a form of punctuated equilibria or human phenotypic plasticity.

    I believe that all humans are phenotypically plastic. By this I mean that just as an organism has the ability to adjust to its physical environment during the course of its lifetime, this ability also includes the aptitude to learn to modify its behaviour towards other individuals and the group. So what if any is the difference between phenotypic plasticity and moral self-education?

    What account can I as a particularist give of our propensity to learn from our ‘moral’ experience? Tact rather than rudeness and crude sexual innuendo is a behaviour that can be rewarded greater compliance and by the delivery more benefits. My reply is that such a learning curve and change of behaviour is not morality triumphing over morally objectionable behaviour in any way, but rather egoistically engendered behavioural modification.

    There may be apparent extrinsic change, but inwardly the ‘immoral agent’ may continue to be as contemptuous of the addressee as he was prior to the pretended respect.

     ‘Moral self-education’ is a myth. The ego learns what behaviour is likely to deliver acceptance and the desired benefits, as opposed to behaviour which is likely to invite chastisement or rejection. It is purposeful behavioural opinion-response compliance – not ‘moral concurrence.’

    Michael Ruse is correct regarding subjectivist Darwinian metaethics, and the non objectivist requirement of moral theory, but wrong in relation to his so-called genetical illusional ploys. If he is (as I believe) correct in his non objectivism and the hoi polloi of humankind were to become convinced of the truth of what he claims regarding covert genetical re-productionism then the motivation on the part of humanity to continue following such moral obligations would evaporate.

    Nobody wishes to be conned – particularly by their own genes. In view of that, my advice to Ruse is to raise a finger to his lips and murmur ‘Shhhhush!’

     Best wishes,

    Jud Evans. 7 months ago

    • Like
    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • RESPONSE ONE
    Gary Writes: My fault – I meant “eliminate” in the sense of stripping unnecessary concepts from any concept (or words from a word). “Unnecessary” in the sense of anything that can literally be divorced from anything even if it leads to a dividing down to void and atoms as in Democritus.

    Jud: I have absolutely no interest in stripping down words? I am not BTW suggesting we should turn our backs on etymology, which is a great interest of mine . In fact every since my boys were old enough I have taught them three new words every day as I have driven them to school. We tear the words apart, examine their semantic components (Greek, Latin, etc) – a vital part of building a vocabulary.

     The confusions of trannie abstractionists does not lie in the morpho-semantic construction of such signs, but in their imagined LOCATION as being ex-carapacial (outside the skull) “things” out in the world like hermeneutic hover-flies, waiting to dart down and fill-out some pseudo-scientific sentence with usefully fictive stuffing. Such logical or illogical objects are then graced by the religious and elevated by other metaphysically challenged with a similar ontological status to real (concrete) objects, rather than existing embedded deep in the brain-meat of humans as forms networked electrochemical intagliated intelligence or glyphic glia.

     Gary: This is dependent on the brain’s power to divide “something,” let’s say “being” into “being” and “non-being” in order to have verbal distinctions in the first place, i. e., this is not that or “this is” and “not that” or positive being versus negative being if you like.

     Ask a question like “What is Jud Evans?,” taking away his meat from his bones, putting his parts in several different places, and then verbalizing “Where, then, is Jud?”

     Jud: The subject you introduce is mereological of which I have written volumes (all out on the internet.) Lots of my stuff is variations of the original “Ship of Theseus” theme.

     One of my pieces is a deconstruction of a pigeon – the other of a car sold by a notorious old greasy-bearded second-hand car-salesman called Plato – a knavish rogue, and an untrustworthy fantasist, an ousia- freak and thoroughly unreliable transcendentalist wretch.

    http://evans- experientialism.freewebspace.com/platosgarage.htm

     Gary: But then you say, “Wait. We can divide even further!” and you bring out your atom smasher and cyclotron and electron microscope. No, at that point you have made matter meaningless because you are dealing with electrons, neutrons, protons which are already very shaky to call them “things” at all,

     Jud: They are all objects and have mass – consult any physics book.

     Gary: and then you break down those already questionable things into quarks and

    mesons and strange particles and photons that still to some mathematical extent can have identity or rather be identified when you then say, “Guys! We haven’t gone anywhere far enough yet. We have to break down those q-things into theoretical/mythical gravitons, the ‘particles’ of gravity which hold these things together as identifiable mesons and quarks and make electrons seem to have orbits around a nucleus divisible into protons and neutrons that are in turn divisible further.

     Jud: Mathematical extent? Identity? No object “has” “identity” Objects are identified by human or animal identifiers. Do you honestly believe Gary that if you keep mereologically dividing objects one could do that for infinity?

     Everybody knows that the metaphysics baloney is on the slippery slide to the reificative rubbish dumps – clutching at a theory of never-ending Russian Dolls is not going to save it. I am (like you) not a physicists, but soon the white-coated ones hit quantum bases-level and you will have run out of metaphysical goal-posts to move backward as science moves forward. 7 months ago • Like

    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • RESPONSE TWO

     Gary: The point being a] this is material reality. Democritus knew it as such simply by the possibility to divide anything infinitely and modern science has simply demonstrated that with experiments. So Democritus fundamentals of ‘atom’ and void, or being and non-being, where division provides intellectual distinction as such, and therefore grounds logic itself in its procedural technique dividing man into generic man (what any man is) as thesis, material man (Socrates) as antithesis, and the consequence of this in synthesis as a conclusion gives a ‘mortal idea’ already imbued with self-division and therefore terminal disintegration. You could say the same thing of “mankind,” then “Great Britons” then people of Sussex, the town of Middlesex, then Tom Jones, then Tom Jone’s finger, then Tom Jones atoms, then Tom Jone’s quarks – which seems silly until you realize the quarks are what are basic, and Gary Moore a mere cloud of atoms and collection of verbal attributes all in turn divisible from him till he is what he is fundamentally – nothing at all.

     Jud: I am afraid you are just falling back on the stale cheese of the so-called Platonic “heteron” (opposite) We had all this out with Dr. Michael Eldred 9 or 10 years ago.

     A human organism can be regarded as a whole (a holism) or multi-levelled two-way [up-down] deterministic pecking order of semi-autonomous sub-wholes, forking into sub-wholes of a lower [usually smaller] order.

     Arthur Koestler’s “The Ghost in the Machine” (1967) was presented again at the Alpbach Symposium (1968) in a paper titled: “Beyond Atomism and Holism – the concept of the holon”. The “holon” represents a way to overcome the dichotomy between parts and wholes and to account for both the self-assertive and the integrative tendencies of an organism. [3]

     I have written elsewhere of our perceptive ‘toggling’ or ‘sensorial switching’ between two modes of seeing the starry sky above. We see but a fraction of our ‘home’ galaxy – a giant revolving gaseous disc which consists of about 200 billion stars, and in one observational sweep of our eyes take in the heavens as comprising of an uncountable glittering myriad of individual stars.

     Then, suddenly, spontaneously, even as our eyes wander from one bright glint to another, a stochastic event occurs which is difficult to control (although some

    degree of constraint over the random variability of the sequence can be acquired.)

     The complexity of ‘multiples of singular individuation’ blurs. Suddenly we see the apparent immensity as the huge, crowded silver integration we call the Milky Way, the four spiral arms of predominantly blue, reasonably young stars between a million and ten billion years old.

    Parmenides realised what we now understand is the obvious – that the cosmos can be thought of in two ways – as a collection of individual items, or as a whole. That a football crowd can be seen as a mass of conglomerate humanity, or as each man picked out as singular individual face in the crowd.

    What Plato failed to grasp was this. From a mereological point of view the Milky Way or a rain-cloud can qualify as an ‘object. ‘

     Not to allow this perceptual modality as Plato did is to demand that each individual be given a name and a roll-call of individuals enumerated to describe a crowd. Human bodies are composed of trillions of single cells which (relativistically) are separated at similar yawning distances from each other as the stars in the sky.

     So what was Plato up to after rejecting Parmenides assertion of *the One?*

    Why, he set about trying to prove that *nothing* exists! The Platonic attempt at an instantiation of the non-existent heteron (‘the other’) can be seen to be initiated in the following dialogue: 7 months ago
    • Like
    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • RESPONSE THREE
    Eleatic Stranger: Strange! I should think so. See how, by his reciprocation of opposites, the many-headed Sophist has compelled us, quite against our will, to admit the existence of not-being.’

     Theaetetus: Yes, indeed, I see.

    Interpreted this means: the negation of the one being does not lead to nothing, i. e. no being at all, but to the other. The ‘other’ as opposite is the ‘to mae on’ of the one. Rendered into modern language this means:

     ‘If there is not ‘something’ in the fridge – there must be ‘nothing’ in the fridge,’ so that means there is something else in there called ‘nothing.’

    There is ALWAYS something in the fridge – oxygen gas.

     Michael Eldred:

     This is ‘one of Plato’s most important discoveries — how otherness enables a non- being to ‘be’ in a certain way, namely, as the opposite (‘antithesis’) of something else (e. g. ’the ugly’ as the non-being of the beautiful).’(Eldred. 2007)

    But NO, we do NOT see! This is an ontological red herring. If as Heidegger rightly claims; ‘Being’ does not exist’ it disposes of the Platonic notion of the reciprocation and instantiation of opposites, for if ‘being’ does not exist – its opposite ‘heteron’ or ‘other’ of *to mae on* or non-being cannot either.

     Plato shows via the idea of ‘heteron’, i. e. of the ‘other’ and ‘otherness,’ that ’otherness’ is a FACET OF BEING which allows the one being to be different from the other non-being and automatically enables the ‘to mae on’ to exist. ‘Plato therefore sets out to analyse the ‘logos’ to show how otherness and therefore falsehood is possible within it. Thus it seems the logos can be both truth and lies – every ‘logos’ is a ‘logos ‘ ti peri tinos’
    — every speaking is saying something about something even if it is a lie, blasphemy or a foolish error. [5] (Eldred. 2007)

     (1) Can the three dimensional cellular objects that make up our human bodies be thought of as true objects? Yes, of course they can.

     (2) Can our human bodies, composed as they are of countless smaller objects, be

    counted as objects? Yes, of course they can.

     (3) Are our visual experiences of *holons* different to our perception of ‘raindrops on a car windscreen,’ or paint spilled on a pavement – that is as patterns of light and dark or the re-bounded light-waves of colour as they impact the retina and are decoded by the brain? No – they are different.

     One HAS to draw the ontological line in the sand somewhere which is exactly what Parmenides did

     If the Milky Way (like the human body, or a heap of sand) is classed as a macro- holeronic object made up of 200 billion smaller stellar objects and their countless planets and satellites, to say nothing of the multitudinous other similarly dispersed smaller denizens of the cosmic plenum, then the Milky Way can be usefully defined as a ‘integrative entity,’ the ontic opposite of the reificational instantiation – the ‘fictionally useful linguistic entity’ – the notorious ‘universals’ like *love* and *freedom* posing as objects, but in reality being nothing more than the result of the self-referential perceptual conventions of human ideation?

     Gary: Democritus even went a step further. He needed “void” as the “nothing” in which matter as atoms could move about in and have place. 7 months ago • Like

    • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
    Jud Unfollow
    Jud Evans • RESPONSE FOUR
     Jud: The eliminativist does not simply wish to destroy the mythic domain of metaphysics, but to help folk understand that the metaphysical Post Code or Zone Number and its actual mapping address is NOT some great Platonist emporium of heavenly forms and useful lie-signs signs which hovers like some air-borne Noah’s Arc in the sky.
     Metaphysical signs and other fictive coding maps to the thinking brain-meat of every man woman and child on the planet who deals in such useful fiction depending upon the local metaphysical menu and religious frenzies in favour at the time.
     The conceptualizations of metaphysics form part of the archival electrochemical printery of all human brains.
     In the metaphorical meaty-movable-type system each of us acts as his own printer’s devil. How emotively hard we thump the data into its fleshy entablature controls whether the memory-data will be a short-term flyer or a long-term archived datergic document.
     But enough of metaphor, as such imprintation exists in physical electrochemical format – a semiotic format that as yet (in spite having the ability to view the brain- tissue in great detail) science has not yet managed to crack the code. But the neurophysiological Rosetta Stone will be discovered.
     So transfer the whole mess of Metaphysics lock, stock and falderal to the domain where it truly belongs and has resided before mankind lived caves, or even before our homo forebears sheltered in the African savannah sheltered by the blessed branches of baobab trees.
    Best wishes,
    Jud

    Edit (9th August 2016) on discovering an ibnternet archive of Juds evans-experientialism web site(Link at end of Quote from Juds Essay Requiem.


    Jud I thought had gone but on discovering the eternal archive of Evans Experienalism he tells me he and his late first wife are still sitting on a bench halfay up 4000 steps in Minori, Amalfi.

    ” In the early afternoon, half way down, close to a wayside religious shrine, we came across a seat for weary travellers. Gratefully we stopped for refreshment. Quietly we sat together eating our meal of sandwiches, delicious tomatoes and green olives. We flushed it down with dark red country wine. The fragrance of the herbs and wild flowers, which surrounded us, was an overpowering and heady mix. Sitting closely together, my arm around her thin shoulders, we gazed out at the stupendous views of the sea and the coast, which spread out below us in both directions. We could see the ribbon of the coastal road that winds its way between Sorrento to Salerno in the distance. Those moments there in the sun were electric. They were charged with a rare and special potency. We were caught in an immortal continuum. It was as if time had stopped and snared us in continuum of experience. I was enwrapped with my lovely wife in an ever-redeemable present. We’ll never leave that place. Time has suspended us there together in an immortal duality. Perhaps one day you’ll tread that path down to Minori. You may chance upon that traveller’s bench. You’ll see us sitting there together, as we always are and as we always will be, gazing silently out to sea. There we’ll remain always, until the warm winds and gentle Mediterranean rains have completed their work of erosion and Ravello and the mountain are no more”.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20030516233701/http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/writing04.htm

     
  • rogerglewis 4:42 am on August 9, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    In Memory of Jud evans (Addendum, Ravello a Requiem) 

    Reposted in memory of Jud and to point folk remembering and still learning from Jud to where they CAN FIND HIS WEB SITE NOW.

    I am confident that this is what I should be doing upon this discovery, Jud still speaks now through his web site as here and it is clear he intended and wanted people to encounter him in his writing and to share his discoveries and enjoyments in philosophy and language.

    According to my theory, which is only in its infancy, my potential readership is immense and will continue to increase exponentially or on a compound basis as the years go by. My hypothesis goes as follows: I have arranged with my solicitor, that upon my death, eight professionally bound bindings of my ‘Florilegium’ (literary flowers) or collected works are to be produced and one given to each of my children.

    With the interest in family history increasing in leaps and bounds, my children may also have these textual heirlooms copied electronically, or in other form or forms as yet undeveloped. I hope that my grandchildren will do the same for their children.

    I hope that they will be able to make sense of the literary snowflakes that the blizzard of my creation wafts their way and that they will be able to scrape a pathway to some sort of understanding of my world as I saw it around me. If each succeeding generation passes on my words, and all my ancestors continue to see value in preserving my scribblings, then the potential readership could be represented by 32,768 persons, only fifteen generations from now, that is in four hundred years time. This number will be squared, to well over one thousand million persons say, a thousand years hence. Fantasy? Yes, of course it is – but it’s good fun!

    But by thaime, [in a thousand year’s time –  it’s hoped that the somewhat Pepysianesque documents will have gained so much historical interest, the readership will have overflowed to the general public, so far greater numbers could be involved.

    Jud( George) Evans 1935-2013 RIP I learned a lot from Jud in our discussions here. I do not want to be mushy in memory and respect for Juds´ elliminatavism

    . http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/brieflifehistory.

    Juds web site is diiscontinued a full archive of recoverable posts may be found here.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20030906101615/http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/index.htm
    Also see comments.

    Jud (George) Evans Tribute 1935 – 2013

    http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/study.htm

    I was thinking of Jud this morning and felt I should get in touch I had noticed his absence from discussion. Heres Jud on eliminativism. Metaphysics, epistemology and logic. – part II RESPONSE FOUR Jud: The eliminativist does not simply wish to destroy the mythic domain of metaphysics, but to help folk understand that the metaphysical Post Code or Zone Number and its actual mapping address is NOT some great Plantonist emporeum of heavenly forms and signs which hovers like some air-borne Noah’s Arc in the sky. Metaphysical signs and other fictive coding maps to the thinking brain-meat of every man woman and child on the planet who deals in such useful fiction depending upon the local metaphysical menu and religious frenzies in favour at the time. The conceptualizations of metaphysics form part of the archival electrochemical printery of all human brains. In the metaphorical meaty-movable-type system each of us acts as his own printer’s devil. How emotively hard we thump the data into its fleshy entablature controls whether the memory-data will be a short-term flyer or a long-term archived datergic document. But enough of metaphor, as such imprintation exists in physical electrochemical format – a semiotic format that as yet (in spite having the ability to view the brain-tissue in great detail) science has not yet managed to crack the code. But the neurophysiological Rosetta Stone will be discovered. So transfer the whole mess of Metaphysics lock, stock and falderal to the domain where it truly belongs and has resided before mankind lived caves, or even before our homo forebears sheltered in the African savannah sheltered by the blessed branches of baobab trees. Best wishes, Jud Posted by Jud Evans

    I am sad to hear this news. I discussed philosophy with Jud through Linked in and had been missing his contributions I feared the worse this morning and posted in his memory today. Jud was a great guy we never met but his warmth and humanity were evident from our brief correspondence and in discussion and he had a wonderful turn of phrase. Cheers Jud I will miss you.In memory of Jud.

    Written in June 2013, on learning of Juds Passing.

    Edit (9th August 2016) on discovering an internet archive of Juds evans-experientialism web site(Link at end of Quote from Juds Essay Ravello a Requiem.


    Jud I thought had gone but on discovering the eternal archive of Evans experientialism he tells me, he and his late first wife, are still sitting on a bench halfway up 4000 steps in Minori, Amalfi.

    Ravello a Requiem.(Excerpt)

    ” In the early afternoon, half way down, close to a wayside religious shrine, we came across a seat for weary travellers. Gratefully we stopped for refreshment. Quietly we sat together eating our meal of sandwiches, delicious tomatoes and green olives. We flushed it down with dark red country wine. The fragrance of the herbs and wild flowers, which surrounded us, was an overpowering and heady mix. Sitting closely together, my arm around her thin shoulders, we gazed out at the stupendous views of the sea and the coast, which spread out below us in both directions. We could see the ribbon of the coastal road that winds its way between Sorrento to Salerno in the distance. Those moments there in the sun were electric. They were charged with a rare and special potency. We were caught in an immortal continuum. It was as if time had stopped and snared us in continuum of experience. I was enwrapped with my lovely wife in an ever-redeemable present. We’ll never leave that place. Time has suspended us there together in an immortal duality. Perhaps one day you’ll tread that path down to Minori. You may chance upon that traveller’s bench. You’ll see us sitting there together, as we always are and as we always will be, gazing silently out to sea. There we’ll remain always, until the warm winds and gentle Mediterranean rains have completed their work of erosion and Ravello and the mountain are no more”.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20030516233701/http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/writing04.htm

     
  • rogerglewis 9:13 am on August 8, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    Guitars For Sale – Vikingsound 1 

    Guitars For Sale – Vikingsound 1

    Learn to play it better than me here

    http://vikingsoundcoop.weebly.com/-mixing–axe-academy.html

    It took me nearly a month to get this far. Remmeber to learn the singing part too.

     
  • rogerglewis 8:20 am on August 6, 2016 Permalink | Reply  

    Labour Hustings and some notes 

    Labour Hustings and some notes

    //giphy.com/embed/oMKQyn7LeBPS8
    via GIPHY








    Britain owes the European Union tens of billions of euros that Brussels will insist is paid out before the country leaves the 28-nation bloc, sources in Brussels have told Handelsblatt’s sister publication WirtschaftsWoche.
    Britain is hardly the only country with outstanding payments. The European Union has for years been moving around a debt mountain totaling more than €200 billion, known as “Reste à liquider” (RAL). A high-ranking E.U. official said Britain’s portion amounts to €25 billion.
    The European Commission is determined not to allow Britain to leave the European Union without paying. Some lawyers in the commission believe that non-payment would amount to a credit default on Britain’s part.
    A deal with Great Britain is unimaginable if the British have not paid their outstanding debt,” according to the E.U. official.
    Picture Source: DPA
    UK can just print the money thats the great thing about having control of your own currency without being in the EURO perhaps they forgot that the UK is not in the Euro Zone and controlled by the ECB. The chancellor should just ask what denominations they would like or more likely in PDF or Word for the electronic notification slip.. There is a very real question here that whether you are for or against Brexit it is essential to understand. Here in Sweden we still have the Kroner this allows a measure of frreedom for implementing policies that suit Sweden which is in Europe but not the EUROzone. One monetary policy for the whole of Europe simply does not work will not and has not worked. No one in Sweden wants the Euro apart form some elite federalist types. Back to the question of why Britain can just print the money. Fiscal rules laid down by the Eu will not apply when the UK leaves the EU the UK will have the power if the government chooses to ditch the Austerity based Neo Liberal dogmna that George Osbourne was sticking too so strongly at huge expebnse to the British economy outside of the City of London ( Signs are Theresa may will do exactly that.). To really gen up on this stuff takes a bit of effort but left right or centre it really is in all of our interests to understand how the money system works at the moment and can actually work with a simple small ammendment to the 1844 Bank Charter Acthttp://positivemoney.org/how-money-works/how-did-we-end-up-here/ so the threats have no teeth to a country with a soveriegn currency creation capability ,the UK has that if it chooses to use it. For SNP members this is also a very real question on the INdie question. Adopting the EURO is democratic suicide. Retaining a share in the pound was the best policy in all of that question or an independant Scots pound would be much better than the Euro for now the Neo Liberal block of the Eu would not tolerate that i.e a scots independent currency, without it there is no political independence.They (the neo liberal faction of the EU) may well lose their control especially if the US have to pull in their horns to do something about the precarious state of the US Dollar so remember all of us interested in democracy in Britiain, Scotland Wales us lot here in Sweden and for the sake of those who suffer with the EURO and the ECB Troika dictatorship elsewhere in the EU Block should remember if we can ditch the Neo Liberals, and get back to a social democratic Europe , UK GB Scotland Wales and Sweden and every where else in Europe, then the better off we will be. Brexit is just one event in a long series of events that will play out during the next Banking crisis which is now upon us, Rate cut and QE announced by BOE today is just the Start. Things in Italy are very bad also in France, SPain and Portugal are terrible Ireland will fall over in the slightest gust of wind and so on and so on. SO the OP story is actually a very thin Broth , expect the lies to get bigger as the problems get worse. And lets get our Pound Striling printing press back off the Private Banks ASAP.
    It is absolutely tragic that this video has only 1897 views. I linked to it on the BBC article on the Bank Of England rate cut and announcement of more QE today. Would someone please listen to Prof. Keen.
    The Aussies Cut beginning of July, This is about that but Steve Keen can shed a lot of light on why the UK is caught up in something much bigger than Brexit.
    Its the debt based money stupid!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsexnY3KBF4
    Steve Keen on the Alternative to neo Liiberalism.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXSmaPGmEVU
    More debt can not and will not cure a debt deflation.
    The level of critical examination of what the interest cut and the QE means is dissappointing. The rate cut relates to Central Bank deposits held by commercial banks, the additonal Term Funding Scheme reflects the truth of the money creation who? Private Commercial banks. Bond purchases relate to more debt issuence Debt=Money. The medicine is proven not to work.mend debt deflation with more debt?
    a turn worthy of Walter Mitty from Owen Smith His ego met a real self in Jeremy Corbyn, Ego or Self , Arete or Spin
    a turn worthy of Walter Mitty from Owen Smith His ego met a real self in Jeremy Corbyn, Ego or Self , Arete or Spin

    Roger Glyndwr Lewis added,
    Adam Curtis Worlds Fair Democracity Bernays.
    Curtis ends by saying that, “Although we feel we are free, in reality, we—like the politicians—have become the slaves of our own desires,” and compares Britain and America to ‘Democracity’, an exhibit at the 1939 New York World’s Fair created by Edward Bernays.
    Roger Lewis replied to his own comment.
    I guess Economic power is just one of several levers of power that require democratisation Adrian. In Gaian Democracies Roy Madron dubs the increasing FInancialisation of the economy under neo -liberalism the MoneyTocracy which is quite a good descriptive made up word applying to what has happened with debt based money and its destruction of democratic institutions. I was thinking about this question earlier and how money is an imposition upon the Promises made in every day social and economic relations. We pay a huge price to make our everyday promises to pay transferable the ultimate price might me the loss of any hope of democracy, such as it ever existed.

    Roger Lewis commented on Owen Jones‘spost.
    Owen thats better you are sounding a bit more chipper and quite right too. What is missing from your reasoning I think is that any truly Left platform is not going to get the blessing or indeed permission of the establishment , I have not read your book on the subject but would be very suprised if it indicated any likieliehood of a Real Left gaining the blessing of the Establishment.

    Roger Lewis commented on Owen Jones‘spost.
    Owen thats better you are sounding a bit more chipper and quite right too. What is missing from your reasoning I think is that any truly Left platform is not going to get the blessing or indeed permission of the establishment , I have not read your book on the subject but would be very suprised if it indicated any likieliehood of a Real Left gaining the blessing of the Establishment.
    Sorry have not finished quite yet. I am very supportive of your work Owen and I think you do and have done a great job on a sticky wicket with the degree of hostility in the Media Channels of the establishment being as rabid as they are. I salute your bravery and dogedness in standing up for your beliefs, many of which I share as will most of all your readers including the nay sayers. What is missing from your analysis if i may say so, is the recognition of a possible paradigm shift in the way that people expect politics and democracy to be done. Roy Madron the author of Gaian Democracies and whose new book I have done some proof reading on and can not wait to read when published ( ‘Super-SmartDemocracies: Dissolving Neoliberalism, Managerialism and Elitism’. ) calls the new kind of democracy super competent here is his Article on Medium https://medium.com/@ROY_MADRON/the-corbyn-model-of-leadership-a7a006405f27#.ciei7nywnLook at the attached engraving and consider this on paradigm shifts. I venture the Timonists do not see the paradigm shift, they believe the people are stupid. The cynics of the left however do believe the People intelligent enough to become angry. Participative Democracy in Cynical with hope for change the Competing elites model is Timonist which believes that things are as they are. Graeber is very good on this dichotomy with Paramenides and Hereclitus (http://commoner.org.uk/10graeber.pdf P.19 They belong, one might say, to the Heraclitean
    tradition, which in Western thought has always been somewhat marginal. Western
    philosophy, after all, really begins with the quarrel between Heraclitus and
    Parmenides; a quarrel that Parmenides won ), Brush up your Diogenese of Sinope he is one of my favourites. (got the tee shirt) 
    http://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2016/08/philosotees-plain-truth-from-freind-of.html Now put your Lamp away finding an honest media outlet likely to give any kind of Left its blessing remmebr the engraving “Cynics saw what people could be and were angered by what they had become; Timonists felt humans were hopelessly stupid & uncaring by nature and so saw no hope for change.”
    Owen, Good article and stick to your own knitting don’t worry about the haters nay sayers and knockers take a leaf out of the Enchiridion in it Epictetus tells us.
    42. When any person harms you, or speaks badly of you, remember that he acts or speaks from a supposition of its being his duty. Now, it is not possible that he should follow what appears right to you, but what appears so to himself. Therefore, if he judges from a wrong appearance, he is the person hurt, since he too is the person deceived. For if anyone should suppose a true proposition to be false, the proposition is not hurt, but he who is deceived about it. Setting out, then, from these principles, you will meekly bear a person who reviles you, for you will say upon every occasion, “It seemed so to him.”
    On the matter of the Left and acceptance in a wider electorate you asked Jeremy Corbyn about Nuneaton in your excellent recent You Tube video. What I think the Left need´s to do is tackle the question of Money creation.
    By tackling this issue we caqn then command the Policy field with regard to Welfare rights from a Distributive point of view and not a re -distributive ‘one soley. Re-distribution of wealth is the bog stick the Welathy always beat the left with and it is based upon the great lie of money creation.
    I have nebver seen you write about the Positive money campaign, the green party had a specisfic monetary reform policy in its 2015 Manifesto along the lines of the Positive Money proposals. Labour could by adopting this same position make great strides against the SNP in Scotland ,who seem very weak in this area. But importantly its a very meaty subject for which the political capital is all up for grabs.
    To Wit this is a very good article on the Swiss Citizens Income referendum.
    http://leconomistamascherato.blogspot.se/2016/07/basic-income-lets-name-real-problems.html
    ”However, the nearly universal misunderstanding of money is a major obstacle. For too long we’ve allowed a small coterie of bankers and “court 

    It is a catchy title and a good read how accurate it turns out to be is
    anybody´s guess.
    Corbynism as a category is a novel concept and going on to accuse this fledgling category of political alliegence of Hubris seems to me to be both jumping the gun and confusing the wider modern tendancy to Hubris in modern manners with the Man Corbyn and his politics grounded in a democracy of the people, himself. He , who me seems to me to be the anti-thesis of Hubris. Some of Mr Corbyns supporters may be over enthusiastic and some of the misdeads attributed to Mr Corbyns supporters could be catagorised as Hubristic yet as you point out the Portland Spinning machine and the lack of self reflection demonstrated by Benn, Eagle and Smith is worthy of any west end farce and elevated to a narcisistic hubris which is difficult to imagine the ordinary Mr Corbyn ever achieving.
    ‘’O wad some Power the giftie gie us 
    To see oursels as ithers see us! 
    It wad frae mony a blunder free us, 
    An’ foolish notion: 
    What airs in dress an’ gait wad lea’e us, 
    An’ ev’n devotion!’’
    Robert Burns Country: To A Louse: On Seeing One On A Lady’s Bonnet, At Church

    The Robert Burns works archive, with full text indexed and searchable online.
    http://www.robertburns.org

    The voting system is indeed a heath robinson affair cobbled together to support the illusion of choice , is it as bad as the US as yet? certanly it is the US oligarchy who have the upper hand amongst the corridors of real power. Their views are parroted by Political Puppets and Media mouth pieces alike. Treating the Electoral and parliamentary politics of the Uk or the USA as anything approaching a functioning democracy seems to me laughable and not worthy of a self declared Marxist. It seems to me much analysis on this point seems as fantastical and naive as any Corbynista clicking revolutionary´s efforts .

    Coleridge in his poem Work Without Hope gives us a clue to the political significance of both Mr Corbyns leadership of the Labour Party and of the Brexit leave result the Key word is Hope.
    ‘’Work without Hope draws nectar in a sieve,
    And Hope without an object cannot live.’’
    Work without Hope

    All Nature seems at work. Slugs leave their lair- The bees are stirring-birds are on the wing- And Winter slumbering in…
    http://www.poetryfoundation.org

    Politics without belief, Surely not an argument any serious Marxist could advance.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel